S.S. Shah vs State of Gujarat and 1 Another

A.J. Desai, J.—By way of the present petition filed under Articles 14, 16 and 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner has prayed to issue writ of mandamus or any other writ, order or direction quashing and setting aside the order dated 27.7.2003 passed by the respondent No. 2-Collector, Patan District, by which, the petitioner was reverted to the post of clerk from the post of the Deputy Mamlatdar. The petitioner has also prayed to pass appropriate order directing the respondent to include the name of the petitioner in the list of seniority of Deputy Mamlatdars on the basis of joining the post of Deputy Mamlatdar from 24.8.2001. Pursuant to the notice, affidavit-in-reply has been filed by the Collector, Patan on 22.12.2012 and has opposed the petition.

It is the case of the petitioner that the petitioner was initially appointed as Clerk on 5.6.1984 in Jamnagar District, and thereafter, was promoted as Deputy Mamlatdar in February, 2000 in the same district. Pursuant to request made by the petitioner, he was transferred to Patan District on the post of Deputy Mamlatdar. It is the case of the petitioner that on 27.7.2003, the Collector, Patan passed the impugned order reverting the petitioner from the post of the Deputy Mamlatdar to the post of the Clerk. Hence, this petition.

Mr. I.S. Supehia, learned advocate appearing for the petitioner submitted that though he was transferred from Jamnagar District to Patan District on the post of Deputy Mamlatdar, there was no reason to revert the petitioner from the post of the Deputy Mamlatdar to the post of the Clerk. Hence, this petition may be allowed.

On the other hand, Mr. Rahul Dave, learned AGP has taken me through the affidavit-in-reply filed by the Collector. He would submit that as per the transfer order dated 3.7.2001 itself, it is clear that the petitioner was working as Deputy Mamlatdar in Jamnagar District only on the temporary establishment and was not regularly promoted on the same post. He was transferred on the same post in Patan District subject to certain conditions mentioned in the said order, particularly condition No. 2. He would submit that the petitioner was transferred to Patan District and since it was newly formed district, no final seniority list was prepared, and therefore, name of the petitioner was not included at the time of preparation of district wise final seniority list on 21.12.2002. He would further submit that the petitioner was appointed on the post of the Deputy Mamlatdar only on the temporary establishment and therefore, he cannot claim any right over the post of the Deputy Mamlatdar.

Heard learned advocates for the respective parties. Perused the transfer order dated 3.7.2001 as well as impugned order dated 27.7.2003. As far as the transfer order dated 3.7.2001 is concerned, the petitioner was working on the post of the Deputy Mamlatdar at Patan only on the temporary post and on request made by the petitioner, was transferred to the post of Mamlatdar, Patan District. Condition No. 2 of the said order itself makes it clear that the petitioner was appointed on the post of the Deputy Mamlatdar only on the temporary establishment of Patan District and it was also made clear that name of the petitioner will be at the bottom of the seniority list. Affidavit also makes it clear that he was appointed on temporary period in the cadre of the Deputy Mamlatdar. Considering the above aspects, I am of the opinion that there is no merits in this matter since the petitioner had no legal right to claim his seniority. Hence, the present petition is disposed of as dismissed. Rule is discharged.